During a question-and-answer exchange following the presentation, council members and staff pressed several practical questions about how the Envision Central vision would be implemented and financed.

A council member asked how the plan aligns with the comprehensive plan the city adopted less than a year earlier. Roger Brooks replied that the master plan “marry[ied] up perfectly” with the comprehensive plan but provides more detailed street-level guidance (street trees, light poles and specific street sections) that the comprehensive plan does not specify.

Members raised gentrification and tax-burden concerns for the Garden District. Brooks said the project team met with about 100 Garden District residents and that, according to the meeting participants, many residents would accept modest property-value increases (he characterized the range as roughly 3–5% annually) if the improvements delivered basic services they had been missing. He emphasized the plan does not rely solely on local residential tax increases and pointed to mixed sources of tax base from hotels, retail and new development to share costs.

Engineering and connectivity questions focused on crossing Centennial Way and the railroad. Brooks acknowledged the Centennial Way crossing is the project’s most difficult engineering hurdle and said the team has been discussing possible underpasses or tunnels with Idaho Transportation authorities; he reiterated that a rail ‘quiet zone’ was a practical prerequisite for attracting hotels and offices and that the cost to implement safety upgrades had been estimated at about $400,000.

Council members also asked how the proposed parking garage and conference center would be funded. Brooks said the plan currently recommends a feasibility and financing study (he cited an approximate $50,000 price) to model public‑private partnership options and to test scenarios including pay‑to‑park operations and condominiumized spaces that hotel developers would buy. He said the URA would not necessarily fund the entire parking structure and that many components could be privately financed or delivered through partnerships.

No binding funding commitments or votes were taken at the session; Brooks asked for a URA retreat to work through numbers and suggested the Agency consider issuing a study or contract to test financing and phasing before committing to construction.